I went with Abu Shubbar to al-Sayyid Muhammad Baqir al-Sadr's house, and on
the way he honoured me and talked to me about the famous Ulama and about Taqlid
(adoption of a legal decision by the Mujtahid) and so on ... until we entered
the house where we found al Sayyid al Sadr surrounded by many young turbaned
students. Al-Sayyid stood up and greeted us, then I was introduced to him and he
welcomed me warmly and sat me next to him. After that he started asking me about
Tunisia and Algeria and about famous Ulama like al-Khidr Husayn and al-Thahir
ibn Ashoor and others. I enjoyed his talk, and despite his high position and the
great respect he commands from his students, I found myself at ease with him and
felt as if I had known him before.
I benefitted so much from that meeting because I listened to the questions asked
by the students and his answers to them, also I appreciated then the idea of
adopting the decision of the living Ulama who could answer all sorts of
questions directly and clearly. I became convinced that the Shia are Muslims
worshipping Allah alone, who believe in the message of our Prophet Muhammad
(saw). At the beginning I suspected that what I saw was just acting, or perhaps
as they call it Taqiyyah, i.e. they show what they do not believe; but these
suspicions disappeared quickly since it was inconceivable that the hundreds of
people that I saw or heard coordinated their acting, and why should there be
acting any- way? Besides who was I, and why should they be concerned about me to
the extent that they used Taqiyyah with me? And all their books, whether they
were old ones that had been written centuries ago or the newly published ones,
all professed the unity of Allah and praise His Messenger Muhammad (saw). There
I was, in the house of al-Sayyid Muhammad Baqir al-Sadr, the famous religious
authority inside Iraq and outside it, and every time the name of Muhammad (saw)
was mentioned, the entire audience shouted in one voice "May Allah's blessings
be upon Muhammad and his household."
When the time for prayer was due, we left the house and went to the mosque,
which was next door, and al-Sayyid Muhammad al-Sadr led the midday and afternoon
prayers. I felt as if I was living among the Companions (of the Prophet), for
there was a solemn invocation from one of the men who had a moving voice, and
when he finished the invocation the whole audience shouted, "May Allah's
blessing be upon Muhammad and his household." The invocation was basically to
thank and glorify Allah, the Great Majesty, and then Muhammad (saw) and his good
and purified posterity.
After the prayer, al-Sayyid sat in the Mihrab (the prayer niche) and people came
to greet him, some asked him private questions, others asked him general
questions, and he answered each one of them accordingly. When the person
obtained an answer for his question, he kissed the hand of al- Sayyid then left,
what lucky people to have such a dignified learned Imam who lives their
experiences and solves their problems.
Al-Sayyid showed me so much care and generosity to the extent that I forgot all
about my family and tribe, and felt that if I stayed for one month with him, I
would have become a Shii, because of his manners, modesty and generosity.
Whenever I looked at him he smiled and asked me if I needed anything, and I did
not leave his company during the four days, only when I wanted to go to sleep.
There were many visitors who came to see him from all over the world; there were
Saudi Shii from Hijaz, others came from Bahrain, Qatar, United Arab Emirates,
Lebanon, Syria, Iran, Afghanistan, Turkey and Black Africa; and al-Sayyid spoke
to each one of them and solved their problems, later they left him feeling happy
and comforted. Here I would like to mention a case which was brought to al-Sayyid
when I was in his company, and I was very impressed by the way he dealt with it.
I mention it because of its historical importance so that the Muslims know what
they have lost by leaving the rule of Allah.
Four men, who were probably Iraqis, judging by their accents, came to see al-Sayyid
Muhammad Baqir al-Sadr. One of them had inherited a house from his grandfather,
who had died a few years ago, and had sold that house to a second person (he was
present then). One year after the completion of the sale, two brothers came and
proved that they were also legal inheritors of the dead man (i.e. the father).
The four of them sat before al-Sayyid and each one of them produced a number of
papers and deeds, which al-Sayyid read, and after he spoke for a few minutes
with the men, he passed a fair judgement. He gave the purchaser the full right
to his house, and asked the seller to pay to his two brothers their shares from
the selling price, and after that they stood up and kissed al-Sayyid's hand and
embraced each other. I was astonished about what had happened and asked Abu
Shubbar, "Has the case ended?" He said, "Yes, everyone received his right.
Praise be to Allah!" In such case, and in such a short time, only a few minutes,
the problem was solved. A similar case in our country would have taken at least
ten years to resolve, some of the plaintiffs would die and their sons resume the
case; often the legal costs exceed the price of the house. The case would move
from the Magistrate Court to the Appeal Court to the Court of Review, and at the
end no one is satisfied, and hatred between People and Tribes are created.
Abu Shubbar commented, We have the same thing if not worse." I asked, "How?" He
said, if people take their cases to the state courts, then they would go through
the same troubles which you have just mentioned, but if they follow the
Religious Authority and commit themselves to the Islamic Laws, then they would
take their cases to him and the problem would be solved in a few minutes, as you
saw. And what is better than the Law of Allah for people who could comprehend?
Al-Sayyid al-Sadr did not charge them one Fils, but if they went to the state
courts, then they would have paid a high price."
I said, "Praise be to Allah! I still cannot believe what I have seen, and if I
had not seen it with my eyes, I would not have believed it at all."
Abu Shubbar said, "You do not have to deny it brother, this is a simple case in
comparison with other more complicated ones which involve blood. Even so, the
Religious Authorities do consider them, and it takes them a few hours to
resolve." I said with astonishment, "Therefore you have two governments in Iraq,
a government of the state and a government of the clergy. He replied, "No, we
have a government of the state only, but the Muslims of the Shii Madhhab who
follow the Religious Authorities, have nothing to do with the government of the
state, because it is not an Islamic government. They are subjects of that
government simply because of their citizenship, the taxes, civil laws and
personal status; so if a committed Muslim had an argument with a non committed
Muslim, then the case must be taken to the state courts, because the latter
would not accept the judgement of the Religious Authorities. However, if two
committed Muslims had an argument, then there is no problem, whatever the
Religious Authorities decide is acceptable to all parties. Thus, all cases seen
by the Religious Authorities are solved on a day-to-day basis, whereas other
cases linger on for months and years."
It was an incident that made me feel content with rule of Allah, praise be to
Him the Exalted one, which helped me to comprehend the words of Allah in His
Glorious Book:
... And whoever did not judge by what Allah revealed, those are they that are
the unbelievers (Holy Qur'an 5:44).
... And whoever did not judge by what Allah revealed, those are they that are
the unjust (Holy Qur'an 5:45).
... And whoever did not judge by what Allah revealed, those are they that are
the transgressors (Holy Qur'an 5:47).
That incident aroused in me feelings of anger and resentment about those who
change the just rules of Allah with some unjust, man-made rules. They even go
further, and with all impudence and sarcasm, they criticize the divine rules and
condemn them for being barbaric and inhuman because it draws the limits. cuts
the hand of the thief, stones the adulterer and kills the killer. So where did
all these new theories, that are foreign to us and our culture come from? There
is no doubt they came from the West and from the enemies of Islam who know that
the application of Allah's rules mean their inevitable destruction because they
are thieves, traitors, adulterers, criminals and murderers.
I had many discussions with al-Sayyid al-Sadr during these days, and I asked him
about everything I had learnt through the friends who talked to me about their
beliefs and what they thought about the Companions of the Prophet (saw), and
about Ali and his sons ... beside many other issues that we used to disagree
upon.
I asked al-Sayyid al-Sadr about Imam Ali and why they testify for him in the
Adhan [the call for prayers] that he is "Waliy Allah" [the friend of Allah]. He
answered me in the following way:
The Commander of the Believers, Ali, may Allah's blessings be upon him, was one
of those servants of Allah whom He chose and honoured by giving them the
responsibilities of the Message after His Prophet. These servants are the
trustees of the Prophet (saw), since each prophet has a trustee, and Ali ibn Abi
Talib is the trustee of Muhammad (saw).
We favour him above all the Companions of the Prophet (saw) because Allah and
the Prophet favoured him, and we have many proofs of that, some of them are
deduced through logical reasoning, others are found in the Qur'an and al-Sunnah
[the Tradition of the Prophet Muhammad (saw)], and these proofs cannot be
suspect, because they have been scrutinized, and proven right, by our own
learned people (who wrote many books about the subject) and those of the Sunni
Madhahibs. The Umayyad regime worked very hard to cover this truth and fought
Imam Ali and his sons, whom they killed. They even ordered people, sometimes by
force, to curse him, so his followers - may Allah bless them all started to
testify for him as being the friend of Allah. No Muslim would curse the friend
of Allah in defiance of the oppressive authorities, so that the glory was to
Allah, and to His Messenger and to all the believers. It also became an
historical land mark across the generations so that they know the just cause of
Ali and the wrong doing of his enemies. Thus, our learned people continued to
testify that Ali is the friend of Allah in their calls to prayer, as something
which is commendable. There are many commendable things in the religious rites
as well as in ordinary mundane dealings, and the Muslim will be rewarded for
doing them, but not punished for leaving them aside.
For example, it is commendable for the Muslim to say after al-Shahadah [i.e. to
testify that there is no God but Allah, and that Muhammad (saw) is His
messenger]: And I will testify that Heaven is true and Hell is true, and that
Allah will resurrect people from their graves.
I said "Our learned people taught us that the priority of the succession was for
our master Abu Bakr al-Siddiq, then to our master Umar al-Faruq, then to our
master Uthman, then to our master Ali, may Allah bless them all." Al-Sayyid
remained silent for a short while, then answered me,
Let them say what they want, but it would be impossible for them to prove it on
legal grounds, besides, what they say contradicts their books which state: The
best of the people is Abu Bakr then Uthman, and there is no mention of Ali
because they made him just an ordinary person, however, the later historians
started to mention him for the sake of mentioning the Rightly Guided Caliphs.
After that I asked him about the piece of clay on which they put their foreheads
during the prayers and they call it "al-Turbah al-Husayniyyah". He answered,
We all prostrate on the dust, but not for the dust, as some people claim that
the Shia do, for the prostration is only for Allah, praise be to Him the
Highest. It is well established among our people, as well as among the Sunnis,
that the most favourable prostration is on earth or on the non-edible produce of
the earth, and it is incorrect to prostrate on anything else. The Messenger of
Allah (saw) used to sit on the dust, and he had a piece of clay mixed with
straw, on which he used to prostrate. He also taught his Companions, may Allah
bless them all, to prostrate on the earth or on stones, and forbade them from
prostrating on the edges of their shirts. We consider these acts to be necessary
and important.
Imam Zayn al-Abideen Ali ibn al-Husayn [may Allah bless them both] took a Turbah
[a piece of clay] from near the grave of his father Abu Abdullah, because the
dust there is blessed and pure, for the blood of the chief martyr was spilt on
it. Thus, his followers continue with that practice up to the present day.
We do not say that prostration is not allowed but on Turbah, rather, we say that
prostration is correct if it is done on any blessed Turbah or stone, also it is
correct if it is done on a mat which is made of palm leaves or similar material.
I asked, with reference to our master al-Husayn, may Allah's blessings be upon
him, "Why do the Shia cry and beat their cheeks and other parts of their bodies
until blood is spilt, and this is prohibited in Islam, for the Prophet (saw)
said: He who beats the cheeks, tears the pockets and follows the call of al-Jahiliyyah
is not one of us."
Al-Sayyid replied,
The saying is correct and there is no doubt about it, but it does not apply to
the obsequies of Abu Abdullah, for he who calls for the avenging of al-Husayn
and follows his path, his call is not of the Jahiliyyah. Besides, the Shias are
only human beings, among them you find the learned and not so learned, and they
have feelings and emotions. If they are overcome by their emotions during the
anniversary of the martyrdom of Abu Abdullah, and remember what happened to him,
his family and his companions from degradation to captivity and then finally
murder, then they will be rewarded for their good intentions, because all these
intentions are for the sake of Allah. Allah - praise be to Him, the Highest -
who rewards people according to their intentions.
Last week I read the official reports from the Egyptian government about the
suicide incidents that followed the death of Jamal Abdul Nasser. There were
eight such incidents in which people took their lives by jumping from buildings
or throwing themselves under trains, besides them there were many injured
people. These are but some examples in which emotions have overcome the most
rational of people, who happen to be Muslims and who killed themselves because
of the death of Jamal Abdul Nasser, who died of natural causes, therefore, it is
not right for us to condemn the Sunnis and judge them to be wrong.
On the other hand, it is not right for the Sunnis to accuse their brothers the
Shia of being wrong because they cry for the chief martyr. These people have
lived and are still living to this present day the tragedy of al-Husayn. Even
the Messenger of Allah (saw) cried after the death of his son al- Husayn, and
Gabriel cried also.
I asked, "Why do the Shia decorate the graves of their saints with gold and
silver, despite the fact that it is prohibited in Islam?"
Al-Sayyid al-Sadr replied,
This is not done just by the Shia, and it is not prohibited. Look at the mosques
of our brothers the Sunnis in Iraq or Egypt or Turkey or anywhere else in the
Islamic world, they are all decorated with gold and silver. Furthermore, the
mosque of the Messenger of Allah (saw) in al-Madinah al-Munawarah and the Kaba,
the House of Allah, in the blessed Mecca is covered every year by a cloth
decorated by gold which costs millions. So such a thing is not exclusive to the
Shia.
I asked "The Saudi Ulama say that touching the graves and calling the saints for
their blessings is polytheism, so what is your opinion?"
Al-Sayyid al-Sadr replied:
If touching the graves and calling the dead is with the understanding that they
could cause harm or render a benefit, then that is polytheism, no doubt about
it, the Muslims are monotheists and they know that Allah alone could cause harm
or render a benefit, but calling the saints and Imams [may Allah bless them all]
with the understanding that they could be an intermediary to Allah, that is not
polytheism. All Muslims, Sunnis and Shias, agreed on this point from the time of
the Messenger up to the present day, except the Wahabiyyah, the Saudi Ulama who
contradict all Muslims with their new creed. They caused considerable
disturbances among the Muslims, they accused them of blasphemy, they spilt their
blood and even beat old pilgrims on their way to the House of Allah in Mecca
just because they say "O Messenger of Allah, may peace be upon you", and they
will never let anybody touch his blessed grave. They had so many debates with
our learned people, but they persisted in their stubbornness and their
arrogance.
Al-Sayyid Sharaf al-Din, a famous Shi'i learned man, went on pilgrimage to the
House of Allah during the time of Abdul Aziz ibn Saud, and he was one of those
Ulama who were invited to the King's palace to celebrate with the King 'Id al-Adhha,
in accordance with the customs there. When his turn came to shake the King'shand,
Sayyid Sharaf al-Din presented him with a leather bound Qur'an. The King took
the Qur'an and placed it on his forehead then kissed it. Al Sayyid Sharaf al-Din
said, "O King, why do you kiss and glorify the cover which is only made out of
goat's skin?" The King answered, "I meant to glorify the Holy Qur'an, not the
goat's skin." Al-Sayyid Sharaf al-Din then said, "Well said, O King. We do the
same when we kiss the window or the door of the Prophet's (saw) chamber, we know
it is made of iron and could not harm or render a benefit, but we mean what is
behind the iron and wood, we mean to glorify the Messenger of Allah (saw) in the
same way as you meant with the Qur'an when you kissed its goat's skin cover.
The audience was impressed by al-Sayyid and said, "You are right." The King was
forced to allow the pilgrims to ask for blessings from the Prophet's relics,
until the order was reversed by the successor of that king. The issue is not
that they are afraid of people associating others with Allah, rather, it is a
political issue based on antagonizing and killing the Muslims in order to
consolidate their power and authority over the Muslims, and history is the
witness to what they have done with the Muslim nation.
I asked him about the Sufi orders, and he answered me briefly,
There are positive and negative aspects to them. The positive aspects include
self-discipline, austere living, renunciation of worldly pleasures and elevating
one's self to the spiritual world. The negative aspects include isolation,
escapism and restricting the mention of Allah by verbal numbers and various
other practices. Islam, as it is known accepts the positive aspects but rejects
the negative ones, and we may say that all the principles and teachings of Islam
are positive.
Comments posted are the sole opinion of the author and may not necessarily reflect the opinions of AIM. |
